The Sacrifice of Christ
The Christadelphian, July 1873, Robert Roberts
“The Sacrifice of Christ”
Questions Answered According to the Truth, Which Is Never to Be ‘Renounced’
BY THE EDITOR
“Even as our beloved brother Paul, also, according to the wisdom given unto him, hath written unto you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable, wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.” —( 2 Pet. 3:15–16 .)
Question 1.— Who was Jesus Christ?
Answer .—God manifested in the flesh (1), seeing whom, the beholder saw the Father (2), with whom Jesus was one (3). As a distinct personage, he was the Son of God (4). He was also the Son of Man, because born of the flesh of David. (5).
1. — 1 Tim. 3:16 : “God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, &c.”
2. —Jno. 14:9 : “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father. How sayest thou, then, Shew us the Father!”
3. —Jno. 10:30 : “I and my Father are one.”
4. —Jno. 1:34 : “This is the Son of God.”
5. — Matt. 16:13 : “Whom do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?”
Question 2.— What is meant by “the Son of God?”
Answer .—That the personage so named was begotten by the Father of the Virgin Mary (1).
1. — Luke 1:35 : “The power of the Highest shall come upon thee, and therefore , shall that holy thing that shall be born of thee be called the Son of God.”
Question 3.— How was he begotten?
Answer .—By the Holy Spirit coming on Mary (1), and causing her to conceive (2).
1. Luke 1:35 : “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee.”
2. — Matt. 1:20 : “That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.”
Question 4.— Of what substance or nature was the body of Jesus?
Answer .—He was of “the seed of David according to the flesh” (1), but as it was the Spirit of the Father that gave that seed the form or organization called Jesus, he was more than the seed of David. He was the Word made flesh (2), and from the beginning thereof, full of the wisdom, grace and truth of the Father (3).
1.— Romans 1:3 : “He was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.”
2.— John 2:14 .: “The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.”
3.— Luke 2:40 : “The child grew and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon him.”
” Luke 2:47 : “All that heard him (at 12 years of age) were astonished at his understanding and answers.”
” John 1:14 .: “We beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.”
Question 5.— What was the nature of his mother ?
Answer .—Flesh and blood of David’s race (1), and consequently of the nature of Adam, from whom David descended (2).
1. — Luke 1:27 : “A virgin . . . of the house of David.”
2. — Luke 4:32 , 38 : “David which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of . . Adam.
Question 6.— What is meant by the nature of Adam ?
Answer .—A nature identical with (1), because derived from Adam (2).
1. — John 3:6 : “That which is born of the flesh is flesh .”
2. — 1 Cor. 15:48 : “As is the earth, earthy, such are they also that are earthy.”
Question 7.— Was Adam immortal before he broke the Eden law ?
Answer .—He was neither mortal nor immortal, so far as declared destiny was concerned: he was in that state in which death would come with disobedience (1).
1. — Gen. 2:17 : “In the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die.” Rom. 5:12 : “By one man sin entered into the world and death by sin.”
Question 8.— Did this condemnation to death fall on Adam only, or on all his posterity also ?
Answer .—On all his posterity also (1).
1. — Romans 5:12 , 19 : “So death hath passed upon all men . . . By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners.”
Question 9.— What is meant by Adam’s posterity ?
Answer .—All who have descended from Adam.
Question 10.— Was Jesus born of two human parents ?
Answer .—No: God was his Father (1) by the direct operation of the Spirit (2). Nevertheless, the substance generated during the nine months’ gestatory period was Mary’s (3), and, therefore, David’s (4), and, therefore, the nature common to believers (5).
1. —Jno. 5:18 : “He said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.”
2. — Luke 1:35 : “The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee.”
3. — Luke 2:6 : “The days were accomplished that she should be delivered” ( 5:9 ), “Mary being great with child.” Matt. 1:20 : “Conceived in her.” Luke 1:35 : “Shall come upon thee.”
4. — Rom. 1:3 : “He was made of the seed of David, according to the flesh.”
5. — Heb. 2:14 : “Forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, it became him likewise to take part of the same.” Phil. 2:8 : “Being found in fashion as a man.”
Question 11.— Did this difference of birth make an essential difference betwixt Jesus and the posterity of Adam ?
Answer .—The question assumes an unscriptural distinction. Jesus, as the Son of Man (1), is as much included in the posterity of Adam as his brethren (2). Physically, he was as much involved in Adam’s transgressions as they (3), for he inherited Adam’s nature from Mary’s blood (4), in which Adam’s life existed, for the life of all flesh is in the blood thereof (5). But the purpose of God was by Himself (6) to raise up a sinless character (7), who should in the very nature under condemnation (8) suffer the condemnation of sin in the flesh (9) by death (10), and thereafter rise again (11) with life for offer (12) to all of the condemned race who should believe and obey him (13).
1. — Mark 10:33 : “The Son of Man.”
2. — Heb. 2:11 : “Both he that sanctified and they who are sanctified are all of one, for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren.”
3. — 2 Cor. 13:4 : “Crucified through weakness .” Isa. 53:4 : “He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows.” Rom. 8:3 : “On account of sin, condemned sin in the flesh.” Heb. 2:16 : “He took on him the seed of Abraham . . in all things made like unto his brethren.”
4. — Gal. 4:4 : “God sent for His Son, made of a woman .”
5. — Lev. 17:11 : “The life of the flesh is in the blood.”
6. — Isa. 59:15 , 16 : “He saw that there was no man, and wondered that there was no intercessor, therefore his arm brought salvation unto him.” Is. 45:22 : “Look unto me , and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth . . . Unto me every knee shall bow and every tongue confess.” Isa. 53:1 : “To whom is the arm of the Lord revealed; for he (that is, Jesus) shall grow up before him.” Rom. 3:19 : “That every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God . . . But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested . . . by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace , through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God hath set forth .” 1 Cor. 1:29 : “That no flesh should glory in his presence, but of Him (God) are ye in Christ, who of God is made unto us, wisdom and righteousness, &c.” 2 Cor. 5:19 : “God was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself.”
7. — 1 Pet. 2:22 : “Who did no sin.” Heb. 1:9 : “Loved righteousness and hated iniquity.” 1 Jno. 3:5 : “In him is no sin.” Heb. 7:26 : “Holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners.” Heb. 4:15 : “Without sin.”
8. — Heb. 2:17 : “For verily, he took not on him the nature of angels, but the seed of Abraham.”
9. — Rom. 8:3 : “On account of sin, condemned sin in the flesh.”
10. — Heb. 2:14 : “That through death, he might destroy that having the power of death”
11. —Jno. 10:17 : “I lay down my life, that I may take it again.” 1 Cor. 20:21 : “By man came also the resurrection of the dead;” (verse 20 ) “Now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first fruits of them that sleep.” Rom 4:25 : “Raised again for our justification.”
12. —1 Jno. 5:11 : “This life is in His son; he that hath the Son of God hath life.” Jno. 17:3 : “Thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as Thou hast given him.” Jno. 14:6 : “I am the way, the truth and the life.”
13. — Heb. 5:8 : “The author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him.” Heb. 7:25 : “Able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him.”
Question 12.— Why was Jesus called “the last Adam?”
Answer .—Because he was to sustain the same federal relation to the race of mankind that Adam the first did. In Adam, mankind were involved in sin and death (1). In Jesus, they are delivered from both (2) without any subversion of the law that condemned them in Adam (3). He was truly the founder of a new race, but he was not in the days of his flesh (4) a specimen of that new race; for them he was weak and mortal (5); whereas the new race are to bear the glorious image of the immortal state (6) in which he now exists (7).
1. — 1 Cor. 15:20 : “In Adam all die.”
2. — Eph. 1:7 : “In whom (Christ) we have redemption through his blood.”
3. — Rom. 3:26 : “That he might be just and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.” 2 Cor. 5:21 : “He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” Rom. 4:25 : “He was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification.”
4. — Heb. 5:7 : “In the days of his flesh he offered up supplication with strong crying and tears unto Him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared. Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered.”
5. — 2 Cor. 13:4 : “Crucified through weakness.” Matthew 26:38 : “My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.” Isaiah 53:12 : “He poured out his soul unto death.” Heb. 2:17 : “Made in all things like unto his brethren.”
6. — 1 Cor. 15:49 : “As we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.”
7. — Acts 13:34 : “God raised him from the dead, now no more to see corruption.” Rom. 6:9 : “Christ, being raised from the dead, dieth no more: death hath no more dominion over him.” 2 Cor. 13:4 : “He liveth by the power of God.”
Question 13.— Was Jesus “in Adam” in the sense of being Adam’s son ?
Answer .—Yes. Though the Son of God (by the Spirit) he was the son of man (Adam) by Mary, (1) partaking of the very nature transmitted from Adam through David and Mary (2).
1. — Mark 6:3 .: “Is not this . . . the son of Mary?” John 5:27 : “The Father hath given him authority to execute judgment also because he is the son of man.”—
2. — Heb. 2:17 : “He took on him the seed of Abraham; wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren.”
Question 14.— Why was Christ made in Adam’s nature ?
Answer .—That he might die for those involved in the condemnation of that nature (1), being put to the proof of obedience under which Adam failed (2). If it had merely been a question of putting him to the proof of obedience, there would have been no reason for his being born of Mary. It would have sufficed for such an object that he had been made out of the ground, direct, a full grown adult as Adam was. But the plan was to condemn sin in its own nature (3), after the type of the serpent in the wilderness. The bitten Israelites were asked to look at the biter impaled, as the condition of being healed. Jesus said this had to be fulfilled in him (4). Human nature as the sinner was the biter, and in him, it was lifted up in condemnation on the cross.
1. — 1 Peter 4:1 : “Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh ; ” 1 Peter 3:18 : “Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God;” Romans 8:3 : “God sent His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and on account of sin condemned sin in the flesh.”
2. — Romans 5:19 : “By the obedience of one shall many be righteous.” Heb. 5:8 : “He learned obedience by the things that he suffered.” Phil. 2:8 : “He humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.”
3. — Romans 8:3 : “Condemned sin in the flesh.”
4. — John 3:14 : “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up.”
Question 15.— In temptation, did Jesus fail or conquer ?
Answer .—Thanks be to God, he conquered, for God was with him.
Question 16.— What power did Jesus earn by his obedience unto death ?
Answer .—This question ignores the relation of God to the operations of the Lord Jesus. “God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself,” is Paul’s definition; confirmed by Peter’s statement on the day of Pentecost that the things done by Jesus, “God did by him” (1). If the question is to be answered categorically, it must be answered in these words: “Being made perfect he became the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him” (2).
1. —See abundant testimony quoted in proof of answer to Question 11.
2. — Heb. 5:8 .
Question 17.— Was the life of Jesus his own ?
Answer .—As the lives of all creatures are “their own” while they have them, the sense would have to be defined before a categorical answer could be given. If the question is, “Was Jesus immortal?” the answer is, No; for in that case he could not have died. If it be: “Had he personally established a claim to life?” the answer is, Undoubtedly, for where Adam had disobeyed, Jesus had accomplished obedience, and “as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”—( Rom. 5:19 .) If it be asked, Could he have given it for the sins of the world if it had not been his own (in the earned sense), the answer is, He might have given it, but it would have been of no avail, because the law of sin would have condemned him personally, and barred the way to his resurrection, in which case, Paul says, Christ would have died in vain. His words are “If Christ be not raised, your faith is vain and ye are yet in your sins.”—( 1 Cor. 15:17 .)
Question 18.— Did God or man give life to Jesus ?
Answer .—“God giveth unto all life and breath and all things;” (1) consequently the question is not specific enough to make its meaning apparent. If it be meant, Did Mary have any participation in the impartation of life to the child born of her, the answer is, Yes; for he was the seed of David according to the flesh. Every one having knowledge is aware that in fœtal life, the child’s life is the mother’s life, ministered by her blood through the umbilical cord; and that the child, so to speak, is by this connection built out of her blood. And as “the life of all flesh is in the blood,” a child cannot partake of her blood, without partaking of her life. Consequently, Jesus, though developed from a divine germ, was framed out of his mother’s substance, and, consequently, was both Son of man and Son of God (2).
1. — Acts 17:25 .
2. —See the numerous proofs in support of Answer to Questions 4, 5, 10, and 11.
Question 19.— The body of Christ, then, was not under condemnation ?
Answer .—Certainly it was; just as much as Mary’s, from which it was formed. As the seed of David according to the flesh, it was weak and mortal. (1) Paul gives prominence to this; and it forms a vital element of the testimony concerning the Messiah. If he was the seed of David according to the flesh, he stood, in the days of his flesh, in all the relations of David, but had some superadded relations, by reason of being the root of David, as well as his offspring (2.) To say that ‘God sent His Son, not in simple flesh, 2 but in the likeness of it,’ is to deny the doctrine which John made necessary for acknowledgment among the first century believers. He said ‘many deceivers are entered into the world who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an anti-Christ. Look to yourselves that ye lose not those things which we have wrought” (3). If it be asked, In what flesh did Jesus come, the answer is, David’s flesh (4); for he is the son of David (5). Still more decisive is the declaration of Paul that he took part of “the same” flesh and blood as that possessed by his brethren (6). Paul does not contradict this in saying that “God sent forth His Son in the ομοιωματι of the flesh of sin.” The word ομοιωματι is truly translated “likeness,” but it is likeness in the sense of identity, and not in the sense of such a resemblance as should leave room for its not being “the same .” This is evident from the derivation of the original word. It comes from the verb ομωο , to join together , which, when united with a substantive termination, gives the idea of a joining together , resulting in a producing of the same . This is illustrated in ομοιομντριος , born of the same mother; ομοιοπατριος , sprung from the same father; ομοιοονσιος , of like substance, that is, the same substance; ομοιολογια , uniformity of speech, that is, the same speech; ομοιοαρκτο , beginning alike ; ομοθνμος , of one mind; ομοθεν , from the same place. If the word “like” be substituted for the word “same,” in all those cases, we shall have the sense in which Paul speaks of Jesus being sent forth in the likeness ομοιωματι of the flesh of sin. It is the sense expressed in his other declarations, that Jesus partook of the same flesh and blood as the children, and that he was of the seed of david according to the flesh . Even of the brethren, of whose absolute identity with the flesh of sin no question will be raised, Paul uses the apparently loose expression, “We have borne the image of the earthy.”—( 1 Cor. 15:49 .) “Image of the earthy” and “likeness of sinful flesh” are of equal force, and both mean an actual participation of the nature spoken of. The fact that ομοιωματος is sometimes used in the sense of resemblance, cannot exclude the evidence that, as applied to Jesus, in the matter of sinful flesh, it means resemblance in all particulars “the same .” To say that “God sent His Son, not in simple flesh, 34 . but in a likeness of it,” is to wrest the word. God sent His Son in the flesh of David, and as that is what would be called “simple flesh,” Jesus was sent in simple flesh— the same .
1. —See numerous proofs in support of Answers to Questions 12 and preceding questions.
2. — Rev. 22:16 : “I am the root and offspring of David.”
3. — 2 John 7 .
4. — 2 Tim. 2:8 .
5. — Matt, 1:1 .
6. — Heb. 2:14 .
7. — Rom, 8:3 .
Question 20.— If Christ had been begotten by Joseph, could he be a redeemer from death ?
Answer .—No, because he would have been an actual transgressor; albeit God is the Redeemer by Christ (1).
1. — 2 Cor. 5:19 . “All things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ.
Question 21.— Had Christ owed his paternity to Adam through Joseph, what would have been the consequence ?
Answer .—He would have been a mere man and a transgressor, and of no more value to us than any other interesting friend.
Question 22.— How would this constitutional sin have affected Christ ?
Answer .—Answered above.
Question 23.— In that case, could he have laid down his life for his friends ?
Answer .—He might have laid it down, but he could not have taken it up, and herein would have lain the failure; for “if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain, and ye are yet in our sins” (1).
1. —Cor. 15:17 .
Question 24.— In offering himself, did Christ offer for his own sins ?
Answer .—It depends upon what is meant. Jesus had no personal offences to offer for. Nevertheless, as antitype of the high priest, who “offered first for his own sins, and then for the people’s” (1), there must have been a sense in which he did so, even as Paul says, “ this he did once , when he offered up himself” (2). The sense in which he did so is obvious in the light of the foregoing answers, that the body offered on Calvary being the nature that transgressed and was condemned in Eden, was offered under a condemnation that affected both itself and those for whom the sacrifice was made.
1. — Heb. 7:27 .
2. —Ibid.
Question 25.— If Christ had been a son of Adam, what would be his character ?
Answer .—Christ was a Son of Adam (1), but not a Son of Adam merely. He was Son of God as well (2). The question is identical with Question 20, and is, therefore, met by the same answer.
1. — Luke 4 .: He was “the Son of David, which was the Son of . . . Adam.”
2. —Jno. 1:49 : “Thou art the Son of God.”
Question 26.— Had Christ been under the penalty of death on account of Adam’s transgression, could he have risen from the dead ?
Answer .—God raised him from the dead, after suffering for sin, because he was without sin (1). If the suggestion contained in the question had any force, it would prove that Christ never could have been raised at all; for if the one offence of Adam could have prevailed to keep Jesus in the grave, what shall we say to “the iniquities of us all” which God “laid upon him?”
1. — Acts 2:24 : “Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that he should be holden of it;” Acts 13:35 : “Wherefore he saith also in another Psalm, Thou shalt not suffer Thine holy one to see corruption.”
Question 27.— Was the sacrifice of Christ an offering for himself ?
Answer .—Answered in the reply to question 24.
Question 28.— What would have been the consequence had Christ died a natural death ?
Answer .—Without doubt, had the will of God been so, his resurrection would have followed immediately and our salvation equally secured; for the triumph lay here, that he rose after dying for sin. “If Christ be not raised your faith is vain, and ye are yet in your sins.” But a natural death would not have been the same trial of Christ’s obedience as his crucifixion. It pleased God to make the captain of our salvation perfect through suffering (1). He was obedient unto (submission to) death, even the death on the cross. It does not appear that the mode of death would have made any difference to the result as regards us, except in so far as might have borne on the question of Christ’s obedience.
1. — Heb. 2:10 .
Question 29.— Then Jesus did not die on the cross to save himself ?
Answer .—This is a mere repetition of questions 24 and 27; see answers thereto.
Question 30.— Was not the death of Christ necessary to purchase immortality for himself ?
Answer .—This a mere repetition in another form of questions 24, 27 and 29; see answers thereto.
Question 31.— Why was the Christ a Jew ?
Answer .—Becuase he could not otherwise have been heir to the throne of David, whose seed he was according to the flesh. Nor could he otherwise have been of the seed of Abraham. Nor could he otherwise have been “made under the law,” and therefore he could not have “borne the curse of the law” for his brethren. “Salvation is of the Jews,” Jesus said; and if he had not been a Jew, he could not, in God’s plan, have been the Saviour.
Question 32.— If Jesus was neither a sinner by constitution nor an actual transgressor, in other words, if free from sin, was he not therefore immaculate ?
Answer .—This question is founded on premisses not conceded in the foregoing answers. Jesus certainly was not immaculate, if by that is meant incorruptible in nature; or, a nature free from impulses in a sinful direction. He was not an actual transgressor. All the desires of the Adamic nature which he had in common with ourselves were kept in absolute subordination to the Father’s will. But he partook of the flesh of sin ( English version —sinful flesh); and if this is what is meant by “a sinner by constitution,” then he was a sinner by constitution. His mission required that he should be in the nature of the transgressing race. The blood of bulls and goats could not take away sin, (1) because they had nothing to do with the transgression. The nature of angels had nothing to do with the transgression. Therefore, “he took not on him the nature of angels;” but the seed of Abraham was the transgressing and condemned nature. Therefore, he took on him the seed of Abraham, and was made, in all things, like unto his brethren.”—( Heb. 2:17 .)
Dr. Thomas’s Mind on the Subject
In a private letter to a friend, who had put questions on the subject in 1869, Dr. Thomas wrote as follows:
“The Lord Jesus said: ‘I pray not for the world, but for them which Thou hast given me, that they may be one, being sanctified through the truth; that they all may be one, as Thou, Father, art in me and I in Thee; that they also may be one in us, as we are one, made perfect in One.’—( John 17 .) This unity of spirit in the bond of peace ( Eph. 4:3 ), is what John styles our fellowship , the fellowship of the apostles, resulting from sanctification through the truth. Hence all who are sanctified through the truth, are sanctified by the second will, through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once. For by one offering he hath perfected for a continuance them that are sanctified ( Heb. 10:10 , 14 ), which one offering of the body was the annulling and condemnation of sin, by the sacrifice thereof.—( Heb. 9:26 .) This bedy, which descended from David ‘according to the flesh,’ was the sacrificial victim offered by the Eternal Spirit.—( Heb. 9:14 .) If David’s flesh were immaculate, this victim, descended from him, might be spotless; but, in that event, it would not have answered for the annulling and condemnation of sin in the flesh that sinned.—( Rom. 8:4 .) If it were an immaculate body that was crucified, it could not have borne our sins in it, while hanging on the tree.—( 1 Peter 2:24 .) To affirm, therefore, that it was immaculate (as do all Papists and sectarian daughters of the Roman Mother) is to render of none effect the truth which is only sanctifying for us by virtue of the principle that Jesus Christ came IN THE FLESH, in that sort of flesh with which Paul was afflicted when he exclaimed, ‘O, wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from this body of death?’—( Rom. 7:11 , 24 .)
It is not my province to issue bulls of excommunication, but simply to show what the truth teaches and commands. I have to do with principles, not men. If anyone say that Jesus Christ did not come in the flesh common to us all, the apostle John saith that that spirit or teacher is not of God; is the deceiver and the anti-Christ, and abides not in the doctrine of Christ; and is, therefore, not to be received into the house, neither to be bidden God speed.—( 1 John 4:3 , 2 ; 2 Ep. 7 , 9 , 10 .) I have nothing to add to or take from this. It is the sanctifying truth of the things concerning the ‘name of Jesus Christ.’ All whom the apostles fellowshipped, believed it; and all in the apostolic ecclesias who believed it not—and there were such—had not fellowship with the apostles, but opposed their teachings; and when they found they could not have their own way, John says “They went out from us, but they—the anti-Christ—were not of us; for if they had been of us (of our fellowship), they would have continued with us; but they went out that it might be made manifest that they were not all of us.”—( 1 John 2:19 .) The apostles did not cast them out, but they went out of their own accord, not being able to endure sound doctrine.—( 2 Tim. 4:3 .)
Then preach the word, &c., and exhort with all long-suffering and teaching. This is the purifying agency. Ignore brother this and brother that in said teaching; for personalities do not help the argument. Declare what you as a body believe to be the apostles’ doctrines. Invite fellowship upon this basis alone. If upon that declaration, any take the bread and wine, not being offered by you, they do so upon their own responsibility, not on yours. If they help themselves to the elements, they endorse your declaration of doctrine, and eat condemnation to themselves. For myself, I am not in fellowship with the dogma that Jesus Christ did not come in the flesh, or that he died as a substitute to appease the fury and wrath of God. The love of God is manifest in all that He has done for man. ‘When all wish to do what is right,’ the right surely is within their grasp. I trust you will be able to see it from what is now before you. And may the truth preside over all your deliberations, for Christ Jesus is the truth, and dwells with those with whom the truth is. Where this is I desire to be.
If I believe the truth as it is in the Jesus Paul preached, and fellowship the doctrine of an immaculate Jesus Paul did not preach, in celebrating the death of the latter with those who repudiate the maculate body set forth by God for a propitiation, is affirming one thing and practising another. Those who hold Paul’s doctrine, ought not to worship with a body that does not. This is holding with the hare and running with the hounds—a position of extraordinary difficulty. Does not such an one love the hounds better than the hare? When the hounds come upon the hare, where will he be? No; if I agree with you in doctrine, I will forsake the assembling of myself with a body that opposes your doctrine, although it might require me to separate from the nearest and dearest. No good is effected by compromising the principles of the truth; and to deny that Jesus came in sinful flesh, is to destroy the sacrifice of Christ.”
JOHN THOMAS.
Another Voice
Some years ago, “Z” wrote thus in the Ambassador , with a force which is not to be invalidated by writing the word “renounce”—
“Very early in the Christian era, notions respecting the Christ were put forward which were not approved by the apostles; and these notions are strongly deprecated in various parts of their writings. But, notwithstanding this, the notions alluded to find many adherents by so-called Christians to the present time. In the end of the first century, John made it a kind of shibboleth to those pretending to have the ‘Spirit of God,’ whether ‘Jesus Christ has come in the flesh ’.—(1 Jno. 4:2–3 .) Any ‘spirit’ or person who could not properly say that Jesus Christ was come in the flesh, was regarded as an enemy and an anti-Christ. Now the persons whom this thing concerned, were all the followers and professed friends and disciples of the Lord: it was not an affair that affected the pagan heathen. Such is exactly the case now. It matters nothing to the sceptical crowd, nor the indifferent masses, whether Jesus were a flesh and blood man or of another composition; but to every one professing to believe on him as the Son of God, and the author of their salvation, the question is of the utmost moment. Whatever tradition may have set up, and ‘divinity’ continued to maintain, goes, or rather will go, for nothing at all at the settling day, inasmuch as what should be known upon the subject has been very decidedly set forth for the benefit of all seekers after eternal life, in the New Testament writings, which upon this, as upon all other things, are in perfect harmony with the Old.
Nobody, perhaps, who admits that Jesus Christ has come, denies that he has come in flesh , but it is a very old disputed point as to what ‘kind of flesh’ he possessed. The great majority of disputants hold that it was not the same sort of flesh as that in which our blood courses from head to foot. And still they allow that it was flesh containing blood, and make no small to-do about the shedding of that blood upon the cross. Paul observes that there are divers kinds of flesh—flesh of beasts, flesh of birds, and flesh of fishes; all flesh is not the same. Nevertheless, there is one particular in which all the various kinds agree, and that is, they are all corruptible; the blood of every one is the life thereof . That is the divine teaching concerning all flesh under the heavens.—( Lev. 17:14 .) The term generally used to point out the nature of Jesus’ flesh, is ‘ immaculate .’ The meaning of this is ‘spotless, pure, undefiled.’ If this were the kind of flesh Jesus had, of course it was not corruptible, for all corruptible flesh of man is defiled by sin in its members, working death. Neither was the blood the life thereof. Now, if the blood of Jesus was not the vitalizing principle, of what use was it to the flesh? Those who contend that Jesus was immaculate, will, perhaps, meet this question with the reply that his blood was immaculate also. In that case, his flesh and blood would, of course, be sinless. This would be the flesh of angels, who are immortal, and, consequently, ‘cannot die any more.’
‘Jesus was Son of David according to the flesh .’—( Rev. 1 . 3 .) The flesh of Messiah was, therefore, David’s flesh: hence he styles it ‘ my flesh.’ But it was the Eternal Spirit speaking in David when he uttered these words. Now Jesus was born of Spirit 5 as well as flesh, so that the flesh of Jesus was also spoken of by the Spirit as ‘my flesh.’ It was the flesh of the Deity, for He was its Father, though the substance was Mary’s, who is called the Lord’s handmaid. Being Mary’s substance, it was, undoubtedly, of her nature—corruptible.—( Luke 1:32 ; Matt. 1:20 ; Luke 1:48 ; Psalm 116:16 .)
“The tragic language of the Spirit in the prophets is conspicuous for its recognition of the corruptibility of the Spirit-formed substance of Mary, styled that ‘holy thing which should be born of her:’ that is the Spirit’s ‘holy child Jesus.’—( Lev. 1:35 ; Acts 4:27 .) ‘I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels. My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death. For dogs have compassed me; the assembly of the wicked have enclosed me; they pierced my hands and feet’—( Psalm 22:14 . 16 .) O Lord my God, I cried unto Thee, and Thou hast heard me; O Lord Thou hast brought up my soul from the grave. What profit is there in my blood when I go down to the pit?’—( Psalm 30:2 , 3 , 9 .) ‘For my life is spent with grief, and my years with sighing: my strength faileth because of my iniquity (the iniquities laid upon him), and my bones are consumed. Mine eye is consumed with grief, yea, my soul and my belly. I am forgotten as a dead man out of mind; I am like a broken vessel.’—( Psalm 31:9 , 10 , 12 .) ‘For day and night thy hand was heavy upon me: my moisture is turned in me into the drought of summer.’—( Psalm 32:4 ). ‘Many are the afflictions . . . He keepeth all his bones, not one of them is broken.’—( Psalm 34:19 , 20 .) ‘The objects gathered themselves against me . . . they did tear me and ceased not.’—( Psalm 35:15 .) ‘There is no soundness in my flesh . . . my wounds stink and are corrupt . . . For my loins are filled with a loathsome disease: and there is no soundness in my flesh.’—( Psalm 38:3 , 5 , 7 ). ‘An evil disease, say they, cleaveth fast unto him: and now that he lieth down, he shall rise up no more.’—( Psalm 41:8 ). ‘Cast me not off in the time of old age,’ (brought on early through grief), ‘forsake me not when my strength faileth. Thou which hast shewed me great and sore troubles, shalt quicken me again, and bring me up from the depths of the earth.’—( Psalm 71:9 , 20 .) ‘My substance was not hid from Thee, when I was made in secret and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being imperfect.’—( Psalm 139:15 , 16 ). ‘Bring my soul out of prison that I may praise Thy name.’—( Psalm 142:7 .) Thus far the testimony of David.
“We now make a few quotations from Isaiah. ‘He hath no form nor comeliness; he is despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgression, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed. He was brought as a lamb to the slaughter; he was cut off out of the land of the living. He made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; He hath put him to grief. Thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin.’—( Isaiah 53 .)
Daniel says ‘after three score and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off.’—( 9:26 .) Amos: “The sun shall go down at noon, and I will darken the earth in the clear day” . . . . And I will make it as the mourning of an only son, and the end thereof a bitter day.’—( 8:9 , 10 .) Micah: “They shall smite the judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek.’—( 5:50 .) Zechariah: ‘As for thee also, by the blood of thy covenant, I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water.’—( 9:11 .) ‘And they shall look upon me whom they have pierced.’—( 12:10 ; John 19:37 .) More texts might be cited from the old Scriptures, but the above being most of the pointed ones, may suffice. All whose minds are not spoiled by ‘philosophy and vain deceit,’ must acknowledge that, numerous as they are, they proclaim, with one voice, the mortality of the Son of God. And if so, the same is the voice of eternal thunder against that tradition from which almost none, beginning at the Old Mother and ending with the newest daughter of that world-honoured Harlot, are exempt.
“Seeing that these Scriptures teach the deathfulness , instead of the deathlessness , of the nature of Christ, it is impossible to doubt that his nature, body, or flesh, was sinful . This must be so, for death is always the consequence of sin in some shape or form. ‘The wages of sin is death.’—( Rom. 6:23 .) We ought not, therefore, to think that this is degrading to the Son of God, as thousands do who hold the immaculate view, but rather to enquire into the reason and necessity of the arrangement. For God does nothing without a reason, and there is a necessity for everything he does. . . .
“The reasons for the nature of Jesus being made sinful, appear from several portions in Paul’s epistles. ‘Jesus was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death .’—( Heb. 2:9 ). The term ‘lower’ can only be understood in reference to body; for the character of Jesus was quite equal to that of the angels, inasmuch as ‘he did no sin, and in his mouth no guile was found.’ And it is also evident that this is the intended sense, from the connection in which it stands to suffering death. Had Jesus been made equal to, instead of ‘lower than the angels,’ it would have been impossible for him to suffer death. For Jesus himself teaches that the angels are immortal, and cannot die any more.—( Luke 20:35 , 36 .) He was, however, made only a ‘ little lower,’ and that little pertains to his nature only. The necessity for the mortality of the Messiah is apparent. Could he not have died in the real and true sense of the word, sin could not have been overcome by him, and hence, as touching man’s redemption, he would have been of no avail. So that there was a great mercy in making him ‘lower than the angels,’ whom he equalled in other respects. The apostle remarks this mercy in these words, ‘that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.’—( Heb. 2:9 .) No other than the mortal nature could have tasted death. To ‘lay down his life’ would have been an impossibility under any other arrangement. And if no death, no resurrection; and if no resurrection of Jesus, the dead in hope of life would have been dead for ever. ‘I am the resurrection and the life.’—( John 11:25 .) Paul exults over the death and resurrection, but more especially the latter, inasmuch as the other could not have profited without it. He says ‘It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again.’—( Rom. 8:34 .)
When the words ‘sin’ and ‘death’ are scripturally apprehended, the work which the Father gave Jesus to do is seen to require him to be of the same formation as those in whose behalf he came. ‘He that sanctifieth, and they who are sanctified are all of one (nature); for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren.’—( Heb. 2:11 .) As the children are, so is the parent. ‘Forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same .’ Lest there should be any misunderstanding about this, the apostle adds, ‘he took on him the nature of angels , but he took on him the seed of Abraham.’ It is manifest, then, that the bodily nature of Jesus was clothed with weakness. Of himself he could do nothing.”
Another
Brother Charles Smith , Edinburgh, writes thus:—
“It is the universal doctrine of the apostacy, that sin was laid on Christ merely by representation, or according to another way of expressing it, in substitution for us. Now Christ was the substance of all the representation contained in sacrifices under the law. What was taken away then only in form, in a sign (which Paul shows 1 was not taken away at all), was taken away really and truly as an accomplished fact , in the body of our Lord. Sin was condemned in its own flesh. Some object to this. Yet it is conceded that Christ was a Jew, to redeem them that were under the curse of the law.
Now was not Jesus really and truly , and as matter of accomplished fact cursed by the law, while at the same time guiltless by his own act? If it was necessary for him to be as, a fact, brought under the curse of the law, that he might deliver them who were under the curse, why should it be said that it was unnecessary he should be brought under the Adamic curse in order that he might be a deliverer for those under that curse, both Jew and Gentile? The truth is very plain: if the body of Jesus was not under condemnation we are still in our sins, then has sin never been condemned in the flesh. Oh, that men could see the power and beauty of God’s arrangements, so that He can be just and the justifier of him who believeth unto Jesus. God is just—adheres to the most strict justice in all His operations. If it had not been so, He could have saved man without the death of His Son at all. The animal sacrifices under the law could have borne sin away by representation, and his holy child Jesus might have been translated in a moment to Holy Spirit nature. One of the silliest things I have seen, is the question ‘Was Jesus born of two human parents?’ Was anybody so born? Man is born of one parent, having been begotten by another. Jesus was no exception. He was begotten by the Father and born of Mary, and therefore, on the principle that that which is born out of the flesh is flesh, he was flesh, which cannot inherit God’s kingdom without being redeemed from corruption. But the character of Jesus was the reflection of the begetter. Every child takes after both parents, some more after one than another. Jesus had the flesh of his mother, which was unclean; but he had the mind of his Father, which was altogether pure. How could an uncondemned human nature be made under a law whose every jot and tittle were enactments regarding its uncleanness, &c.! But some have no understanding though their words be many. God’s way of putting away sin has not entered into their apprehensions.”
The Substance of the Matter
That the Father is the Redeemer of man. No second person redeems us from Him; but He redeems us from sin. He does it on a principle that (1) excludes the glorying of the flesh, and (2) preserves a harmony between His work in condemnation and His work in salvation.
Illustration of the first point .—He manifests Himself by the Spirit in the nature condemned. The result was a Son in whom He was well pleased, holy, harmless and undefiled. God was in him for the work of reconciliation. Apart from the Father, Christ was and could do nothing. He was the Word made flesh, and the Word was God. The result of his work is therefore of God and not of man, that the praise might be to the glory of His grace . Had he been merely a man as Adam the first was, the glory would have been to man; but the last Adam was the Lord from heaven—God manifest in the flesh.
Illustration of the second point .—Man condemned in Adam must bear the condemnation, for God in His ways is without variableness or the shadow of a turning. But, if man is left to bear the condemnation himself, it destroys him, because his own transgressions stand in the way of escape. Therefore God provides him one who can bear it and be rescued from it after it is inflicted. This required one in the nature of the transgressor, for in God’s ways, sentence upon man cannot be borne by angel or beast, but by him only on whom it lies. Jesus was such an one, for he partook of the very flesh and blood of Adam’s condemned race through Mary. Yet the sufferer, though in the nature of the transgressor, had to be personally sinless, otherwise God could not raise him. Hence it was necessary that God Himself should manifest Himself in the seed of Abraham, thus producing a sinless character in the condemned nature of the first man. This was done by the miraculous conception of the Son of Mary, who “ through the Eternal Spirit , offered himself to God.”—( Heb. 9:14 .) Raising His Holy One from the grave, he offered all men forgiveness by faith of what had been done in Him, and obedience to His commandments.
He who renounces this, renounces the truth, and repeats the history of first-century declension.
Editor .
5 Begotten, not born.—[ Ed . Christadelphian ]